My Lords, I am not sure that I follow that. What about the consistency of Mr Salmond's position? I have to answer for a number of things in your Lordships' House but, fortunately, I do not have to answer for Mr Salmond.
I agree with the comment that the noble Lord, Lord Empey, has encapsulated what the problem is. There are differential solutions around the United Kingdom—Northern Ireland charges £9,000—so simply to adopt this amendment would not solve the problem across the country. I do not believe that the Bill is the right place to address this. I have indicated that we are prepared to look at the European Union dimension and that we are more than willing to engage with the different Administrations. I just do not want to suggest to your Lordships' House that this matter can be resolved easily; it would be wrong to suggest that. Even if one does not accept the word ““tsunami””, the consequences, which could include a complete disruption of the Scottish higher education system, are sufficiently uncertain for it not to be a risk that we can take. Even allowing for one year's grace, the problems would still arise in subsequent years. Therefore, I urge my noble friend to withdraw his amendment.
Scotland Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Wallace of Tankerness
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 26 March 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Scotland Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
736 c1223 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:29:50 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_821628
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_821628
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_821628